Anti - Cap Ship Fighter Weapons

[Chaotic Neutral]

The basically you want giant guided multi-warhead missiles? Isn't there already a reason that SW doesn't do this anyway?

[SapphireFox]

^ The CR 90 idea is promising. The volume - cost scaling is as reasonable a method as any, so 200 to 300 per ISD works out very well for me.

If we wanted to outfit a few of these CR 90 for recce work, what would we be looking at? Is it possible to get the acceleration up a lot simply by ditching berthing mass etc., or is there a stable way of upgrading the engines, given the generator?

To your questions the answers are yes and yes. As seen on the militarized version of the CR90 the Assassin-class Corvette the engines can be upgraded and since the craft carries 6 double turbolasers it would be somewhat safe to say the reactor has been upgraded as well. Corvettes have been used for recon work for a long time and I doubt that given the adaptability of Corellian designs this class would disappoint in making an ideal recon platform. In addition modding the CR90 or the assassin-class for even more speed would not be unreasonable. If you are willing to add more engines to the block (most likely on the horizontal plane) then you would likely sacrifice some of the energy armament to allow for more engine power. For the capital strike option just a quick bolt on of the one shot capital proton torpedo boxes I mentioned earlier and poof instant torpedo boat master of the hit and run.

[SapphireFox]

The basically you want giant guided multi-warhead missiles? Isn't there already a reason that SW doesn't do this anyway?

No. They already have this idea and use it. Ex. see Torpedo Sphere

[Bottlestein]

@ SapphireFox:

Fantastic. The CR 90 modded is the answer then.

If we could replace "fighter" with "corvette" in my earlier posts

[keen320]

Why hasn't anyone used missile boxes in star wars before? You'd think it would be a pretty simple idea, just bolt on some extra launchers for more one punch firepower. The same thing seems to happen in some other sci-fi. Weber's Honor series talked like missile boxes on warships was some kind of brilliant innovation, although to to be fair, there were reasons why they couldn't just bolt a bunch on.

Of course, aren't proton torpedoes and such supposed to be pretty hard to get in large numbers due to expense?

[SapphireFox]

Why hasn't anyone used missile boxes in star wars before? You'd think it would be a pretty simple idea, just bolt on some extra launchers for more one punch firepower. The same thing seems to happen in some other sci-fi. Weber's Honor series talked like missile boxes on warships was some kind of brilliant innovation, although to to be fair, there were reasons why they couldn't just bolt a bunch on.

Of course, aren't proton torpedoes and such supposed to be pretty hard to get in large numbers due to expense?

I always thought that the reason we didn't see box launchers is because it would make SW ships look too modern earth like. I'm sure someone else will say some in universe reason, but most in universe reasons can be overcome. As for the proton torpedoes being hard to get, it would be the first I ever heard of it. Sure stockpiling a large amount of any guided missile gets expensive quickly but I don't see getting enough torps for the job being that hard even for an imperial remnant faction.

[Imperial528]

Personally I think its because something like a turbolaser can do basically the same thing to a much greater effect, both economically and tactically, than a swarm of single-shot missiles/plasma bolts can, and it can do it more than once. When it comes down to it, such single-shot weapons are usually small, and in SW, just by the power levels involved, you need many, many of these small weapons to get the equivalent firepower of the larger ones, and by then you've probably spent more one missiles than it would cost to add another heavy TL to a cruiser or capital ship.

Although, something like say, a capacitor-powered single-shot HTL mounted on a craft that normally couldn't power such a weapon would be quite useful, since the HTL itself will cost less than the cap-ship they usually come on, and you could use a base ship or a space station to recharge the capacitors or batteries.

[Simon_Jester]

The real problem I see here is that a missile this size is going to be a target in its own right, as will the launch platform. It's so much bigger than a fighter that it's going to be a lot easier to kill from outside its effective range. Sure, theoretically you could build a missile that, by sheer size, carries a warhead big enough to take out an ISD in one shot... but what happens if the ISD is shooting back?

[Star Wars 888]

What's weird is that Star Wars bombers can often times disable star destroyers faster than turbolasers can, even though turbolasers are FAR, FAR larger with a FAR, FAR larger energy source and can fire at a FAR, FAR faster rate and hit FAR, FAR more.

The Battle of Kuat during the Second Galactic Civil War lasted for over a week. Both sides were unable to make headway. Then, Luke Skywalker and his Jedi in Stealth X's join the battle, and disable Confederation star destroyer in a matter of seconds when a week of turbolaser barrage couldn't.

[Imperial528]

Well, if you slip in when the shields have been lowered during either a low point in the battle or when the combat has stopped for the time being, more than half of the enemy's defensive power is gone, so you can easily hit the soft pieces. Especially when the enemy doesn't have all sensors on because they don't expect an attack. Normal bombers would've been destroyed.

[SapphireFox]

Normal bombers would've been destroyed.

Huh? Why would you say that? Normal bomber craft in SW are little more than fighter size craft and are usually listed amongst the fighter complements anyway.

[Batman]

The things are called 'Stealth Xes'. You think maybe that might have something to do with their higher survivability?

[Simon_Jester]

Also, you have the whole "Jedi make the best pilots because mental powers trump training and experience with the hardware!" thing going.

Though to be fair, a fair number of the new Jedi at least had a background as pilots alongside their Jedi training. The old Jedi don't have that excuse...

[SapphireFox]

The things are called 'Stealth Xes'. You think maybe that might have something to do with their higher survivability?

*looks up at earlier posts* Must have skimmed that part. Oh well, my bad.


Tho speaking of my thought process earlier, why are the bombers in SW so small anyway? I mean you would think that one would prefer a craft that actually has a significant amount of ordnance more than a standard fighter in ones normal bombers. Out of all the SW bombers I know only the K-wing and the Tie bomber seem to carry anything close to enough ordinance normally.

[Purple]

Not necessarily.
It depends on what you want them to do. If you wanted to build a strategic bomber than yes, you need the payload. But if you wanted a craft that can do precision strikes, raids or just generally act as a close support craft for ground troops (like say the Ju-87 in WW2) than you are going to put speed (so it can get in and out without being shot down) and agility before payload.

Perhaps the other craft were made with that sort of requirements in mind.

[SapphireFox]

Well in this case in the anti-cap ship weapon thread, I want them to be hunting capital ships. So in this case I believe they need the payload. Considering that in the clone wars the Y-Wing was built and used as a general purpose bomber that most bombers like it are little different in purpose.

[Purple]

Again, not necessarily. You don't have to pack that much munitions to cripple an enemy starship. And if a starship is to large (like an ISD) you certainly won't be able to carry enough munitions for a brute force kill anyway unless you send in hundreds of bombers.

Instead, you will want to go in and hit critical targets like say those sensor domes or the turrets when the enemy is distracted by fire from your own warships. Much like the attack on the death star, just on a smaller scale.

[SapphireFox]

While what you say is true one would expect that for a true attack bomber you would need enough ordiance to take out at least a medium size target like a Carrack or possibly a Stike class ship. Hopefully a squadron or more would be able to pose a significant threat to a larger vessel like an ISD.

[Simon_Jester]

Why not make smaller "true" attack bombers and use big swarms of them?

An ISD is a kilometer or more long; it makes Nimitz-class carriers look tiny. How many Y-Wing equivalents could you launch from a platform that size dedicated to the task?

[Broken]

The Venator-class Star Destroyers of the Clone Wars carried 36 ARC-170's (full size starfighter), 192 Alpha-3's (micro-fighter), and 192 Eta-2's (also micro-fighters) plus 40 gunships and numerous ground walkers, shuttles and such. Those numbers are from wookieepedia and are copied from the ICS, iirc. Don't have my copy with me, so I can't check. Since an ISD is much larger then a Venator, I would guess you could carry a comparable complement of full size starfighters/bombers compared to the Venator's micro-fighters, assuming you dedicate as much interval volume in the design process.

The question becomes can even "true" bombers do real damage to capital ships that are alert and combat ready. The closest we see in the EU was from the poorly thought-out Black Fleet Crisis which had K-Wings armed with Ion Torpedos or some such shield-busting weapon. Even then, iirc, they were used in mass attacks as part of dedicated task-forces, not as something to send in alone and unsupported. Nor were they expected to do the actual ship-killing, but were merely part of a coordinated assault. Of course, this is going by memory as I have not read those books in years and years.

[SapphireFox]

Why not make smaller "true" attack bombers and use big swarms of them?

How much smaller are we talking about here because a one point you would be off using the small strike bombers like the K-Wing and Tie Bomber or fighter-bombers like the Y-Wing and X-Wing

An ISD is a kilometer or more long; it makes Nimitz-class carriers look tiny. How many Y-Wing equivalents could you launch from a platform that size dedicated to the task?

Lets see the only dedicated carrier designs I can think of off the top of my head are the Escort Carrier the Eidolon and the Venator-Class SD. Of those only the Venator qualifies on size. So if the dedicated ship can carry ~400 smaller starfighters then lets say half that in larger bomber type craft. So that said one could expect a max loadout of approximately ~200 bomber type craft on such a platform. (a pretty decent swarm if you can get it all in the air)